Time to Go?
UD alum, friend, and too-infrequent blogger Mike McKain has a post up at his blog, McLefty. He makes some valid points, but I am surprised to see him advocate for an immediate withdrawal:
Yes, the "surge," which is more importantly a change in strategy than an increase in numbers has come a lot later than it should have. No contending otherwise. Yes, there is a chance it may fail. But for now, it is the best chance we have. The "surge" also did not reach full strength until June 15.
Once the "surge" is over, a drastic drawdown of troops seems like an appropriate course of action. Prime Minister Maliki's statements from the past weekend about Iraqi security forces being ready for us to leave are just that right now, statements. But it may show an attitude within the Iraqi government that this is their fight, which is great news for the long term. Hopefully, once the majority of the insurgency is rooted out (that's what the "surge" is for: a change from fighting insurgents to fighting the insurgency) we can begin major troop withdrawals and act in more of a stability/peacekeeping role.
Mike goes on to talk about the US role in the international arena:
A lot of this is fodder for other posts down the line, but Musharraf seems to be doing his best to combat the Taliban while holding onto popular support. Pakistan is a critical ally, and one we have to be careful about pushing too hard, because Pakistan's nukes getting into the hands of a Taliban-like government is too great of a threat to chance.
As I've mentioned before, I agree with Joe Biden about Darfur (video: 1, 2). I see Darfur not only as the atrocity it is, but also as another front for the War on Terror.
I don't question Mike's patriotism in the least, as it is clear his position is motivated by keeping American lives safe and American power strong. I'm glad there are some other people out there willing to have an honest discussion about this issue.
Related: My reivew of Fiasco, Iraq Pullout Scenarios
Everyday in the news, I see evidence that such a state of affairs already exists, and that the risk of it increasing is in no way diminished by a massive American presence. The “surge” might have worked if we had done it in earnest or earlier in the conflict; however, a creeping surge this late in the game was ill-fated from the start and should not be allotted much more time to fail; the lives of our soldiers are too valuable for that.
Yes, the "surge," which is more importantly a change in strategy than an increase in numbers has come a lot later than it should have. No contending otherwise. Yes, there is a chance it may fail. But for now, it is the best chance we have. The "surge" also did not reach full strength until June 15.
Once the "surge" is over, a drastic drawdown of troops seems like an appropriate course of action. Prime Minister Maliki's statements from the past weekend about Iraqi security forces being ready for us to leave are just that right now, statements. But it may show an attitude within the Iraqi government that this is their fight, which is great news for the long term. Hopefully, once the majority of the insurgency is rooted out (that's what the "surge" is for: a change from fighting insurgents to fighting the insurgency) we can begin major troop withdrawals and act in more of a stability/peacekeeping role.
Mike goes on to talk about the US role in the international arena:
As Russia seems content to escalate old tensions, Pakistan continues to refuse to fully cooperate against the Taliban and the hunt for Bin Laden, Iran and Turkey threaten to expand the Iraq conflict into a regional war, North Korea remains unstable, genocide continues more or less unchecked in Darfur – the threats to international peace are everywhere, including within our own borders.
A lot of this is fodder for other posts down the line, but Musharraf seems to be doing his best to combat the Taliban while holding onto popular support. Pakistan is a critical ally, and one we have to be careful about pushing too hard, because Pakistan's nukes getting into the hands of a Taliban-like government is too great of a threat to chance.
As I've mentioned before, I agree with Joe Biden about Darfur (video: 1, 2). I see Darfur not only as the atrocity it is, but also as another front for the War on Terror.
I don't question Mike's patriotism in the least, as it is clear his position is motivated by keeping American lives safe and American power strong. I'm glad there are some other people out there willing to have an honest discussion about this issue.
Related: My reivew of Fiasco, Iraq Pullout Scenarios
Labels: Iraq
| Permalink | 
